Videos that need to be seen as the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination nears.

My apologies in advance if this is considered unnecessary. If the Mods see fit, then go ahead and delete this thread. I did a search and the videos
Here are dead links.

Bill Hicks had some observations that I'm sure many can identify with:

Before you get too deeply into the Evidence of Revision vids, here is a decent clip of JFK assassination rarities that the majority of Americans have
probably never seen. Don't let the beginning with Sinatra throw you off, it only lasts a few minutes...

This YT user has put the EOR series into playlists that will make it easier for you to watch 1 - 5 without a lot of searching. They go from JFK to
RFK to Jonestown.

The man who created the original series went on to add a 6th disk about the MLK assassination. I guess it's because the "I Had A Dream" speech is
copyrighted that YT keeps taking it down. This YT user has all of disk 6 available, but you'll need to go watch the parts one at a time. I wouldn't
put it off too long, though, YT will probably take it down again...

THE FIRST VIDEO OF PART 6 SHOULD NOT BE PLAYED WITH SMALL CHILDREN AROUND. IT SHOWS LYNCHINGS AND ONE MAN'S BODY BURNING ON A
BONFIRE!!!

-- A bit of a spoiler --
Toward the end is a bit of information that completes the circle and brings us back to the same cabal that killed JFK.

Just finished the beginning of part 1 of the Revision series. Professionally done. Although I don't know where its leading yet, I like what I am
seeing thus far. I think other members should give this a look see.

As we approach the 50th Anniversary of JFKs death there will be disinformation in the media to bum steer us away from the truth. Make sure you keep
your speculative goggles, tinfoil hat and BS filter on max.

I've started to watch DVD 1 and there is some amazing stuff here although there is also a lot of stuff I think might be a little extraneous.

One thing that blew me away was the clip in Part 1 - 4 of 10 where they showed the "finding" of the rifle in the School Book Depository and you can
see *another rifle* as clear as day leaning up against the wall right behind the one the LEO is holding.

How did they EVER explain that?

My guess is that no one in a position to do anything about it saw that video clip. Certainly not the Warren (Whitewash) Commission and it was
probably not reviewed by the House Select Committee on Assassinations but I don't have a list of the evidence they reviewed...

Watched the Bill Hicks and the second video. Excellent videos!
(On my way to starting the series now)
As for my sentiments on the subject:
I am thoroughly impressed and disgusted at the same time. All I can really say is quite simple. It is our own fault for being so gullible and stupid.
The facts are there and to me there is no more conspiracy. Our friendly revenue takers have purposely hidden the truth on numerous occasions because
they can get away with it and kill those who dissent. And everyone knows it! Which is why no one can gather a massive union of force and
combat this malicious beast.

I kinda feel the stuff that might seem extraneous has value in the fact that very, very few people have seen it put together in this way (or not at
all).

As you get into the documentary you will see that the Warren Commission was concocted by Johnson & Hoover to block the creation of any serious
investigation. I feel pretty confident in saying they spent no more time on the phantom gun than they did on the Mauser being held by the straps.

It's put into perspective pretty well in a section of "Best Evidence" by David Lifton. After he purchased the Warren Report volumes, he initiated
contact with Wesley Liebeler (I hope this is right. My copy of the book is at our son's) and asked a series of questions. He finally found an
anomaly that even Mr. Liebeler admitted struck him as odd and he agreed to contact another attorney that had been part of the process. When Lifton
checked back, Mr. Liebeler admitted that the only reply he'd been able to get was, "Our job was to CLOSE doors, not to open new ones."

The Mauser disappeared and the "new" murder weapon materialized.

When I discovered this series of vids, every moment I could spare was spent on watching them. This was on my bucket list. I didn't want to go to my
grave without knowing what really happened in Dallas.

-- snip --
All I can really say is quite simple. It is our own fault for being so gullible and stupid.

I agree, with one exception. You can't form an opinion about something you've never seen or heard about. I was dumbfounded by the string of famous
network newspeople reporting about the find of the Mauser and then Cronkite coming on the next morning to report the new "official" murder
weapon.

All that extra footage that makes the point so beautifully is what kept the man that put these fantastic DVDs from being able to market it! It sure
makes me think of the difference between watching Newtown live and what the average person on the street believes...

I stumbled upon this by pure luck. I'll let the note from the page set this up...

Editor’s note: When They Kill A President by Roger Craig is an unpublished manuscript written by a man who, in his capacity as a Deputy Sheriff,
witnessed many critical moments in Dallas on November 22, 1963 and beyond and did not change his story despite the staggering costs
to himself. I purchased a copy of this manuscript in the 1980s from Tom Davis, a first-generation JFK assassination researcher. I met Tom through his
capacity as a bookseller in Capitola, California after some years of listening to Mae Brussell’s weekly radio program, World Watchers
International.

I truly grieve for Roger Craig. This country could use more men like him. Once he heard that first shot, all thought of his instructions to stand
and serve as nothing but a spectator of the motorcade were forgotten. It would never have occurred to him to stand idly by as an American president
was attacked.

Please go to the site and read the full thing. There is info that I was still unaware of. Time and time again, Craig tried to do the job he
was sworn to do only to have the dupes undermine him... Here is a good example:

I bolted toward Houston Street. I was fifteen steps from the corner—before I reached it two more shots had been fired. Telling myself that it
wasn‘t true and at the same time knowing that it was, I continued to run. I ran across Houston Street and beside the pond, which is on the west side
of Houston. I pushed a man out of my way and he fell into the pond. I ran down the grass between Main and Elm.

People were lying all over the ground. I thought, “My God, they‘ve killed a woman and child,” who were lying beside the gutter on the South side
of Elm Street. I checked them and they were alright. I saw a Dallas Police Officer run up the grassy knoll and go behind the picket fence near the
railroad yards. I followed and behind the fence was complete confusion and hysteria.

I began to question people when I noticed a woman in her early thirties attempting to drive out of the parking lot. She was in a brown 1962 or 1963
Chevrolet. I stopped her, identified myself and placed her under arrest. She told me that she had to leave and I said, “Lady, you‘re not going
anywhere.” I turned her over to Deputy Sheriff C.I. Lummy) Lewis and told him the circumstances of the arrest. Officer Lewis told me that he
would take her to Sheriff Decker and take care of her car.

The parking lot behind the picket fence was of little importance to most of the investigators at the scene except that the shots were thought to have
come from there.

Let us examine this parking lot. It was leased by Deputy Sheriff B. D. Gossett. He in turn rented parking space by the month to the deputies who
worked in the court house, except for official vehicles. I rented one of these spaces from Gossett when I was a dispatcher working days or evenings. I
paid Gossett $3.00 per month and was given a key to the lot. An interesting point is that the lot had an iron bar across the only entrance and exit
(which were the same). The bar had a chain and lock on it. The only people having access to it were deputies with keys. Point: how did the woman gain
access and, what is more important, who was she and why did she have to leave?

This was to be the beginning of the never-ending cover up. Had I known then what I know now, I would have personally questioned the woman and
impounded and searched her car. I had no way of knowing that an officer, with whom I had worked for four years, was capable of losing a thirty year
old woman and a three thousand pound automobile. To this day Officer Lewis does not know who she was, where she came from or what happened to her.
Strange!

-- snip --
After watching this video...there is absolutely no doubt anymore...

THEY KILLED KENNEDY !!!!!!...and by they...I mean...not Oswald.

No doubt. No doubt.

Once I discovered these amazing vids, any chance of me getting anything done the rest of the day went right out the window.

Author, Mark Lane, did a documentary called "Two Men In Dallas" (meaning JFK and R. Craig). The music is admittedly cheesy, but it was released in
1976, after all... You can find all the parts on YT. Here's a selection:

If this darned thing is still acting up, I guess just click to watch it on YT. Don't seem to know how to get this one right.

what specifically shocked me is...multiple first hand witnesses, most notably including the doctors that were present in the hospital when they
brought Kennedy in.

The doctor (Crenshaw i think) who stood by him...until his last breath...said..."he was shot from the front, at least two possibly 3 shooters".
Since this man is a doctor...I reckon he knows the difference between exit and entry wounds. Surely he has a credible authority to make such a
claim...

what specifically shocked me is...multiple first hand witnesses, most notably including the doctors that were present in the hospital when they
brought Kennedy in.

The doctor (Crenshaw i think) who stood by him...until his last breath...said..."he was shot from the front, at least two possibly 3 shooters".
Since this man is a doctor...I reckon he knows the difference between exit and entry wounds. Surely he has a credible authority to make such a
claim...

But this is only one of the shocking interviews...

The Warren Commission was nothing but a whitewash of the assassination and there were dozens who should have been given the chance to testify
but were never called.

Sorry it takes so long to get there, but what you'll see at the 6:30 mark is shameful. Special Agent James Hosty, FBI, is shown testifying before the
FBI oversight committee about the letter that Lee Harvey Oswald hand delivered to him upon arriving in Dallas, why the Warren Commission never heard
of it and his destruction (under orders) of that letter just two or three hours after Oswald died.

College Hill’s pattern was repeated on Capitol Hill in 1933 and 1934. The ‘Little Congress’ of congressional aides was a social
organization. But Lyndon Johnson saw in its presidency a means of entree to men of power. Again there were repeated complaints, this time from fellow
Little Congress members, that he had ‘stolen’ elections (‘Everyone said it: “In that last election that damn Lyndon Johnson stole some votes
again”‘). When, in 1933 and 1934, Johnson was accused of ‘stuffing’ a ballot box, he was not yet represented by Abe Fortas, and his accusers
succeeded in accomplishing what Fortas prevented Johnson’s 1948 accusers from accomplishing: opening the ballot box. When the Little Congress box
was opened, it was found
that the accusations against Johnson were true. Again, as at college, what he had done was unprecedented: no one had ever stuffed a Little Congress
ballot box before. (And, perhaps no one would ever stuff one again, for after his departure the organization quickly reverted to its easygoing social
role; ‘My God, who would cheat to win the presidency of something like the Little Congress?’) In his first campaign for the Senate, he stole
thousands of votes, and when they proved insufficient (‘He ['Pappy' O'Daniel] stole more votes than we did, that’s all’), his reaction was to
try to steal still more, and his failure in this attempt was due only to [an] irredeemable tactical error, not to any change in the pattern . . .

At each previous stage of his career, then, Johnson’s election tactics had made clear not only a hunger for power but a willingness to take (within
the context of American politics, of course; the coups and assassinations that characterize other countries’ politics were not and never would be
included in his calculations) whatever political steps would be necessary to satisfy that hunger. Over and over again, he had stretched the rules of
the game to their breaking point, and then had broken them, pushing deeper into the ethical and legal no-man’s-land beyond them than others were
willing to go.

Now, in 1948 . . . he was operating beyond the loosest boundaries of prevailing custom and political morality. What had been demonstrated before was
now underlined in the strongest terms: in the context of the politics that was his life, Lyndon Johnson would do whatever was necessary to win. Even
in terms of the most elastic political morality — the political morality of 1940s Texas — his methods were amoral” (Robert A. Caro, *The Years
of Lyndon Johnson: Means of Ascent,* 397-98).

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.